Mapping the Landscape of Authentic Leadership: A Bibliometric Analysis of its Influence on Entrepreneurial Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This bibliometric analysis, titled "Mapping the Landscape of Authentic Leadership: A Bibliometric Analysis of its Influence on Entrepreneurial Performance," delves into the vibrant and evolving field of Authentic Leadership. By examining a decade's worth of research publications, this study unveils crucial insights into the adaptability and relevance of Authentic Leadership in addressing contemporary leadership challenges. The dynamic year-by-year distribution of publications serves as a foundation for future investigations, encouraging scholars to delve deeper into evolving priorities and interests within this domain. Key journals, including Leadership Quarterly, Journal of Business Ethics, and Leadership and Organization Development Journal, emerge as central hubs in the academic discourse on Authentic Leadership, fostering a rich and multifaceted discussion within the academic community. Notably, the United States, with significant contributions from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, plays a pivotal role in driving research on Authentic Leadership, underscoring the global nature of this field. Additionally, an analysis of primary research keywords provides a lens through which the dynamic nature of Authentic Leadership research is revealed, offering valuable direction for future investigations. Researchers can utilize these keywords as guides for the development of new research topics and questions in the domain of Authentic Leadership. The implications of this review extend to both researchers and practitioners, emphasizing the adaptability and evolving nature of Authentic Leadership in addressing contemporary leadership challenges. Furthermore, this study underscores the importance of key journals as primary outlets for disseminating research work. As we look to the future, the agenda for research on Authentic Leadership should consider cross-cultural perspectives, practical application, gender and diversity intersections, methodological advancements, the impact on performance, and ethical dimensions. Authentic Leadership offers a dynamic landscape with promising opportunities for researchers to explore new dimensions and applications, ultimately contributing to addressing the leadership challenges of our time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.036 | 0.084 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".